Estrategias de resumen de Textos Expositivos Dos estudios de casos en el marco de la teoría del discurso
Abstract
El primer estudio, cualitativo, transversal y descriptivo, caracteriza las técnicas de redacción de un resumen de texto expositivo, hecho por estudiantes de 3º de secundaria (N= 86, n=31, muestreo aleatorio simple), del colegio Saint George de Santa Cruz de la Sierra, en el cual no hay protocolos explícitos y sistemáticos para esta enseñanza. Al efecto se utilizó el marco conceptual de la teoría del discurso (van Dijk, 1977, 1983), y los datos arrojados por Brown y Day (1983; también Mandler y Johnson, 1977), con los cuales se formalizó e institucionalizó un procedimiento de análisis basado en macro-reglas. El segundo estudio, cuantitativo y transversal, utiliza la misma muestra, pero con diseño pre - post evalúa la utilidad para la comprensión lectora de un resumen redactado por el docente siguiendo las macro reglas mencionadas² . La muestra incluye un subgrupo de 11 estudiantes diagnosticados TDAH. El primer estudio confirma los resultados de Brown y Day (op. cit.): los estudiantes capaces de sintetizar las ideas principales y jerarquizarlas sólo alcanzan el 16%. Además, no se encontró diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre la calidad del resumen redactado por estudiantes TDAH y no -TDAH. En el segundo estudio, el resumen no contribuye a mejorar la comprensión lectora - al contrario: incluso cuando es proporcionado inmediatamente después del pre -test, la simplificación y reorganización del texto activan esquemas de interpretación contrarios a los hechos. Del primer estudio se deduce la necesidad para la institución de normalizar el proceso de enseñanza de esta técnica, haciendo hincapié en macro reglas diferentes de Suprimir. El segundo estudio sugiere evitar la práctica de resúmenes confeccionados por el docente. Limitaciones: no se consideraron los beneficios de resúmenes producidos por los estudiantes; además, la recogida de los datos y la evaluación de la calidad de los resúmenes depende de instrumentos que precisan una más extensa validación³.
The first study, qualitative and cross-sectional, characterizes the technique of summarization of an expository text, followed by middle school students (N=86, n=31, simple random sample) from the private school Saint George in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, where explicit and systematic protocols for its teaching could not be found. The theoretical framework was provided by the theory of discourse (van Dijk, 1977, 1983), together with the empirical benchmark set by Brown and Day (1983; see also Mandler and Johnson, 1977), which formalized a procedure of analysis based on macrorrules. The second study, same sample but quantitatively designed (pre-post test), assesses the usefulness for the students' reading comprehension of a summary written by the author according to macro rules. The sample includes a subgroup of 11 ADHD students. The first study confirms, on a whole, Brown and Day's results: the students capable of summarizing and relating the main ideas add up to only 16%. No significant statistical effect was noticed due to ADHD symptomatology. The second experiment shows that the summary crafted by the teacher as a means of facilitation of the comprehension does not contribute to raise its level - on the contrary: even if delivered immediately after the pre-test, simphfication and reorganization of contents prompt schemata running counter the facts. The first study points to the necessity of standardizing the teaching of summarization, laying stress on processes different from Suppression. The second study suggests that summaries facilitated by the teacher are of no use for the students' reading comprehension and should be avoided. Limitations: the benefits of summaries written by the students were beyond the scope; on the other hand, the gathering and analysis of the quality of the summaries rest on instruments whose validity calis for a more extensive check.
The first study, qualitative and cross-sectional, characterizes the technique of summarization of an expository text, followed by middle school students (N=86, n=31, simple random sample) from the private school Saint George in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, where explicit and systematic protocols for its teaching could not be found. The theoretical framework was provided by the theory of discourse (van Dijk, 1977, 1983), together with the empirical benchmark set by Brown and Day (1983; see also Mandler and Johnson, 1977), which formalized a procedure of analysis based on macrorrules. The second study, same sample but quantitatively designed (pre-post test), assesses the usefulness for the students' reading comprehension of a summary written by the author according to macro rules. The sample includes a subgroup of 11 ADHD students. The first study confirms, on a whole, Brown and Day's results: the students capable of summarizing and relating the main ideas add up to only 16%. No significant statistical effect was noticed due to ADHD symptomatology. The second experiment shows that the summary crafted by the teacher as a means of facilitation of the comprehension does not contribute to raise its level - on the contrary: even if delivered immediately after the pre-test, simphfication and reorganization of contents prompt schemata running counter the facts. The first study points to the necessity of standardizing the teaching of summarization, laying stress on processes different from Suppression. The second study suggests that summaries facilitated by the teacher are of no use for the students' reading comprehension and should be avoided. Limitations: the benefits of summaries written by the students were beyond the scope; on the other hand, the gathering and analysis of the quality of the summaries rest on instruments whose validity calis for a more extensive check.
Description
Vol. 14, No. 14